Methods for the treatment of erectile dysfunction using fispemifene

ABSTRACT

A method of treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED) comprises the step of administering fispemifene to a subject in need thereof in an amount effective to raise the subject&#39;s testosterone level. Fispemifene may be used in combination with a PDE-5 inhibitor in individuals who have failed to respond sufficiently to conventional ED treatment. Methods are also disclosed of treating ED by administering clomifene, enclomifene, ospemifene, toremifene and mixtures thereof in combination with a PDE-5 inhibitor.

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a divisional application of U.S. patent applicationSer. No. 13/848,325, filed Mar. 21, 2013, which is a continuation ofU.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/795,986, filed Jun. 8, 2010, whichis a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/138,560, filedJun. 13, 2008, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional ApplicationNo. 60/943,706, filed Jun. 13, 2007. The disclosures of the priorityapplications are incorporated by reference herein in their entirety.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The invention relates to a method for treatment of erectile dysfunction(“ED”) using fispemifene, including: the use of fispemifene as a primarytreatment for ED in individuals with low testosterone; the use offispemifene in combination with another ED drug (such as type Vphosphodiesterase (“PDE-5”) inhibitors) as combination therapy; and theuse of fispemifene for the treatment of ED in individuals who havefailed treatment with a PDE-5 inhibitor. The invention also relates tothe use of selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) including, butnot limited to, fispemifene, clomifene, enclomifene, ospemifene,toremifene, afimoxifene, arzoxifene, bazedoxifene, lasofoxifene,ormeloxifene, raloxifene, tamoxifen, droloxifene, levormeloxifene, andidoxifene and mixtures thereof in combination with a PDE-5 inhibitor totreat ED.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Erectile dysfunction, defined as the persistent inability to maintain anerection sufficient for satisfactory sexual performance, affectsmillions of men worldwide. The conventional treatment for ED isadministration of a PDE-5 inhibitor, such as sildenafil, vardenafil ortadalafil. However, a significant percentage of subjects receiving PDE-5inhibitors do not respond adequately. Approximately 30% to 50% of menreceiving sildenafil, for example, do not adequately respond to therapy,such that other therapeutic options for the treatment of ED aredesirable.

The reasons that some subjects do not respond to treatment with PDE-5inhibitors are not completely known. Clearly, testosterone plays a rolein ED and may impact a subject's response to conventional ED treatment.Studies conducted in which testosterone is co-administered to EDsubjects in combination with a PDE-5 inhibitor suggest that raising thetestosterone level in certain individuals may improve their response toconventional ED treatment. However, testosterone treatment is associatedwith undesirable side effects, including prostate stimulation,gynecomastia, and adverse effects on lipid metabolism.

Thus, it further would be desirable to provide a medicine that can becoadministered with a PDE-5 inhibitor, having the effect of raisingtestosterone levels and improving response to ED treatment, with fewerof the deleterious side effects of exogenous testosterone treatment.

Men with chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD), HIV-infectedmen, and men with metabolic syndrome experience muscle wasting and lowtestosterone. In one study, low testosterone was observed in subjectswith diabetes mellitus who failed conventional ED treatment, and someimprovement was noted when the subjects were treated with testosteronetogether with VIAGRA® (sildenafil citrate). Muscle wasting inRN-infected men having low testosterone was ameliorated with a combinedregimen of testosterone and exercise. Thus, it further would bedesirable to develop ED treatments for these individuals, which at thesame time would address the concomitant problems of muscle wasting andED.

As disclosed in U.S. Published Patent Application No. 2006/0293294,which is incorporated herein by reference, selective estrogen receptormodulators (SERMs) have been suggested as a treatment for androgendeficiency in males.

It is believed that fispemifene, which is a SERM that acts as anestrogen antagonist, as a result of its unique properties and mechanismof action, holds special attractiveness as a treatment for ED, alone orin combination with other therapies. Fispemifene, which is the genericname for (Z)-2-{2-[4-(4-Chloro-1,2-diphenylbut-1-enyl)phenoxy]ethoxy}ethanol, is a selective estrogen receptor modulator having bothestrogen-like and antiestrogenic properties. Fispemifene has been shownclinically to increase serum testosterone levels in males, as describedin the aforesaid U.S. Published Patent Application No. 2006/0293294, andis the most preferred agent for use in combination with a PDE-5inhibitor, as disclosed herein.

It is believed that fispemifene acts as an antiestrogen at the level ofthe hypothalamic-pituitary axis, diminishing the negative feedback ofestrogen, which results in the enhanced production of luteinizinghormone (LH) resulting in a subsequent increase in testosterone levels.

Based on the foregoing, fispemifene is herein proposed as a treatmentfor ED, alone or as adjuvant therapy with other medications. Fispemifenemay be especially useful in the treatment of erectile dysfunction in menhaving low testosterone, as a result of age or disease condition.

Ospemifene (2-(4-((Z-4-chloro-1,2-diphenylbut-1-enyl)phenoxy) ethanol))is a SERM which may be administered in combination with conventional EDtreatment according to the present invention. Suitable forms and dosageamounts of ospemifene are disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,750,576, which isincorporated herein by reference.

Clomifene(N-[2-[4-(2-chloro-1,2-diphenyl-ethenyl)phenoxy]ethyl]-Nethyl-ethanamine)(mixture of cis- and trans-isomers) and enclomifene (transclomifene, ora mixture in which trans-clomifene predominates), have been proposed asagents for increasing testosterone levels. U.S. Published PatentApplication No. 2004/0097597, which is incorporated by reference,proposes a dosage of trans-clomifene of about 1 to about 200 mg toincrease serum testosterone, and the connection between low testosteronelevel and erectile dysfunction is noted, although treatment of ED perse, alone or in combination with a PDE-5 inhibitor, is not disclosed inthat application.

Based on the foregoing, clomifene or enclomifene are also proposed as acombination therapy with a PDE-5 inhibitor for treatment of ED.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

In one aspect, the invention is a method of treating erectiledysfunction by administering an effective amount of fispemifene to asubject in need thereof. Fispemifene is administered to raise thetestosterone level of these subjects to improve erectile functioning.

In another aspect, the invention involves administering fispemifene,toremifene, clomifene, enclomifene, ospemifene or a mixture thereof, inan amount effective to increase serum testosterone to an individualundergoing ED treatment who is determined to have low testosterone. Incertain embodiments, the invention relates to administering one or moreselective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) including, but notlimited to, fispemifene, clomifene, enclomifene, ospemifene, toremifene,afimoxifene, arzoxifene, bazedoxifene, lasofoxifene, ormeloxifene,raloxifene, tamoxifen, droloxifene, levormeloxifene, and idoxifene andmixtures thereof, in an amount effective to increase serum testosteroneto an individual undergoing ED treatment who is determined to have lowtestosterone.

The individual may have low testosterone as a result of advanced age oras a result of a disease condition, for example. In another aspect, theinvention is a method a treatment of ED comprising administeringfispemifene, toremifene, clomifene, enclomifene, ospemifene or a mixturethereof, to an individual in need thereof, in combination with a PDE-5inhibitor. This may be an individual who has been determined to beinsufficiently responsive to treatment with a PDE-5 inhibitor alone. Incertain embodiments, the invention also relates to methods for treatingED comprising administering one or more selective estrogen receptormodulators (SERMs) including, but not limited to, fispemifene,clomifene, enclomifene, ospemifene, toremifene, afimoxifene, arzoxifene,bazedoxifene, lasofoxifene, ormeloxifene, raloxifene, tamoxifen,droloxifene, levormeloxifene, and idoxifene and mixtures thereof to anindividual in need thereof, in combination with a PDE-5 inhibitor.

In still another aspect, the invention is a method of treating erectiledysfunction in an individual having low testosterone and who issuffering from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, HIV infection, ormetabolic syndrome, by administering an effective amount of fispemifene,clomifene, enclomifene, ospemifene or toremifene to said individual. Incertain embodiments, the invention relates to methods for treating ED inan individual having low testosterone and who is suffering from chronicobstructive pulmonary disease, HIV infection, or metabolic syndrome, byadministering an effective amount of one or more selective estrogenreceptor modulators (SERMs) including, but not limited to, fispemifene,clomifene, enclomifene, ospemifene, toremifene, afimoxifene, arzoxifene,bazedoxifene, lasofoxifene, ormeloxifene, raloxifene, tamoxifen,droloxifene, levormeloxifene, and idoxifene and mixtures thereof, tosaid individual.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 depicts a graph of the data of the study from Example 1 showingthe serum total testosterone (ng/dL) over time for each of the treatmentgroups (placebo or fispemifene 10 mg, 30 mg, 100 mg, or 300 mg/day). Thebottom line on the graph is the 30 mg/day dose denoted in triangularsymbols, the top line on the graph is the 300 mg/day dose denoted insquare symbols, the curve second from the top is the 10 mg/day dosedenoted in circular symbols. The symbol legend for each dose on theright hand margin of the graph is across from the corresponding dosevalue on Day 28 on the graph;

FIG. 1 depicts a graph of the data of the study from Example 1 showingthe serum total testosterone (ng/dL) over time for each of the treatmentgroups (placebo or fispemifene 10 mg, 30 mg, 100 mg, or 300 mg/day). Thebottom line on the graph is the 30 mg/day dose denoted in triangularsymbols, the top line on the graph is the 300 mg/day dose denoted insquare symbols, the curve second from the top is the 10 mg/day dosedenoted in circular symbols. The symbol legend for each dose on theright hand margin of the graph is across from the corresponding dosevalue on Day 28 on the graph;

FIG. 3 depicts a graph of the data of the study from Example 3 showingthe calculated mean percent change in serum total testosterone at 4weeks for each of the treatment groups;

FIG. 4 depicts a graph of the data of the study from Example 3 showingthe serum total testosterone versus time for each of the treatmentgroups. The bars from left to right for each of the BL (baseline), 2week, 4 week, and 6 week timepoints (the 6 week timepoint occurred 2weeks after the discontinuation of study drug at week 4) correspond tothe placebo, 100 mg, 200 mg, and 300 mg/day doses, respectively;

FIG. 5 depicts a graph of the data of the study from Example 3 showingserum total testosterone (ng/dL) versus dose at BL and after 4 weeks ofdosing for each of the treatment groups. The bars from left to right foreach of placebo, 100 mg, 200 mg, and 300 mg/day doses are the BL(baseline) and 4 week time points, respectively;

FIG. 6 depicts a graph of the data of the study from Example 3 showingserum free testosterone levels (ng/dL) measured by equilibrium dialysisover time for each of the treatment groups. The bars from left to rightfor each of the BL (baseline), 2 week, 4 week, and 6 week timepoints(the 6 week timepoint occurred 2 weeks after the discontinuation ofstudy drug at week 4) correspond to the placebo, 100 mg, 200 mg, and 300mg/day doses, respectively;

FIG. 7 depicts a graph of the data of the study from Example 3 showingthe calculated serum free testosterone level (ng/dL) over time for eachof the treatment groups. The bars from left to right for each of the BL(baseline), 2 week, 4 week, and 6 week timepoints (the 6 week timepointoccurred 2 weeks after the discontinuation of study drug at week 4)correspond to the placebo, 100 mg, 200 mg, and 300 mg/day doses,respectively;

FIG. 8 depicts a graph of the data of the study from Example 3 showingthe serum DHT (dihydrotestosterone) (pg/mL) levels over time for each ofthe treatment groups. The bars from left to right for each of the BL(baseline), 2 week, 4 week, and 6 week timepoints (the 6 week timepointoccurred 2 weeks after the discontinuation of study drug at week 4)correspond to the placebo, 100 mg, 200 mg, and 300 mg/day doses,respectively.

FIG. 9 depicts a graph of the data of the study from Example 3 showingthe serum LH (luteinizing hormone) level (IU/L) over time for each ofthe treatment groups. The bars from left to right for each of the BL(baseline), 2 week, 4 week, and 6 week timepoints (the 6 week timepointoccurred 2 weeks after the discontinuation of study drug at week 4)correspond to the placebo, 100 mg, 200 mg, and 300 mg/day doses,respectively;

FIG. 10 depicts a graph of the data of the study from Example 3 showingthe serum FSH (follicle stimulating hormone) level (IU/L) over time foreach of the treatment groups. The bars from left to right for each ofthe BL (baseline), 2 week, 4 week, and 6 week timepoints (the 6 weektimepoint occurred 2 weeks after the discontinuation of study drug atweek 4) correspond to the placebo, 100 mg, 200 mg, and 300 mg/day doses,respectively;

FIG. 11 depicts a graph of the data of the study from Example 3 showingthe serum sex hormone-binding globulin level (nmol/L) over time for eachof the treatment groups. The bars from left to right for each of the BL(baseline), 2 week, 4 week, and 6 week timepoints (the 6 week timepointoccurred 2 weeks after the discontinuation of study drug at week 4)correspond to placebo, 100 mg, 200 mg, and 300 mg doses, respectively;and

FIG. 12 depicts a graph of the data of the study from Example 3 showingthe serum estradiol levels (pg/mL) over time for each of the treatmentgroups. The bars from left to right for each of the BL (baseline), 2week, 4 week, and 6 week timepoints (the 6 week timepoint occurred 2weeks after the discontinuation of study drug at week 4) correspond tothe placebo, 100 mg, 200 mg, and 300 mg/day doses, respectively.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The androgens, of which testosterone is the principal agent, are malesex hormones, responsible for the development of the masculine sexcharacteristics. Defects in cavernosal tissue arising from testosteronedeficiency can impair erectile capacity.

A shortage of testosterone (hypogonadism) may be classified into twoprincipal forms, which are designated primary and secondaryhypogonadism. Primary hypogonadism is the lack of testosteroneproduction or a decreased testosterone production within the bodyoriginating from a malfunction of the testes, which are the mainsynthetic location for testosterone. Primary hypogonadism includestesticular failure due to congenital or acquired anorchia, XYY Syndrome,XX males, Noonan Syndrome, gonadal dysgenesis, Leydig cell tumors,maldescended testes, varicocele, Sertoli-Cell-Only Syndrome,cryptorchidism, bilateral torsion, vanishing testis syndrome,orchiectomy, Klinefelter Syndrome, chemotherapy, toxic damage fromalcohol or heavy metals, and general disease (renal failure, livercirrhosis, diabetes, myotonia dystrophica). Patients with primaryhypogonadism show an intact feedback mechanism in that the low serumtestosterone concentrations are associated with high FSH(follicle-stimulating hormone) and LH (luteinizing hormone)concentrations. However, because of testicular or other failures, thehigh LH concentrations are not effective at stimulating testosteroneproduction.

Secondary (or hypogonadotrophic) hypogonadism arises where the mainreason for the low testosterone level is a malfunction of thehypothalamus or the hypophysis. This involves an idiopathic gonadotropinor LR-releasing hormone deficiency. This type ofhypogonadism includesKallman Syndrome, PraderLabhart-Willi Syndrome, Laurence-Moon-BiedlSyndrome, pituitary insufficiency/adenomas, Pasqualini Syndrome,hemochromatosis, hyperprolactinemia, or pituitary-hypothalamic injuryfrom tumors, trauma, radiation, or obesity. Because patients withsecondary hypogonadism do not demonstrate an intact feedback pathway,the lower testosterone concentrations are not associated with increasedLH or FSH levels. Thus, these men have low testosterone serum levels buthave gonadotropins in the normal to low range.

Men experience a slow but continuous decline in average serumtestosterone after approximately age 20 to 30 years (age-relatedtestosterone deficiency). Researchers estimate that the decline is about1-2% per year. Moreover, as men age, the circadian rhythm oftestosterone concentration is often muted, dampened, or completely lost.

The normal ranges for testosterone concentration vary as well as thedefinition of the limit value to diagnose hypogonadism. For the purposesherein, unless otherwise stated: if serum total testosterone levelsare >400 ng/dL (i.e., 14 nmol/L), there is no testosterone deficiencyand this is referred to as a “normal testosterone level;” if total serumtestosterone level is <400 ng/dL, the subject may be considered to havea “low testosterone level.” An “effective amount” of an agent inconnection with raising testosterone, is the minimum amount required toachieve an increase in testosterone level, whether or not testosteroneis raised to a normal level. In some instances, it may be preferable todefine low testosterone as <250 ng/dL or <300 ng/dL.

Erectile function is commonly evaluated by tabulating responses providedto the International Index of Erectile Function (“IIEF”). The IIEF is avalidated self-administered questionnaire used to assess therapeuticefficacy of an ED treatment. The IIEF is composed of five domains:erectile function, libido, orgasmic function, sexual satisfaction andoverall satisfaction. Other questionnaires may be utilized, includingthe Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM), which is an abbreviated formof the IIEF; and the Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP), which involvesquestions of both the subject and the subject's partner. As used herein,a directional improvement in any component of these criteria isconsidered “treatment,” and the minimum dosage required to obtain suchimprovement is defined herein as an “effective amount.” For example, animportant criterion of success of an ED therapy may be determined to bethe frequency of successful intercourse; and an increase in thatfrequency, whether or not statistically significant, may be deemed asuccessful treatment. Alternatively, improvement may be measured bychanges over various domains of the IIEF, such as an increase in libido,or in overall satisfaction. These improvements also constitute examplesof “treatment,” and the minimum dosage required to achieve improvementon one or more of these axes is an “effective amount.” Theadministration of fispemifene, enclomifene, ospemifene, clomifene ortoremifene to treat ED has particular relevance when administered incombination with a PDE-5 inhibitor to a subject who continues to havesymptoms of ED despite treatment with a PDE-5 inhibitor. In certainembodiments, the administration of selective estrogen receptormodulators (SERMs) including, but not limited to, fispemifene,clomifene, enclomifene, ospemifene, toremifene, afimoxifene, arzoxifene,bazedoxifene, lasofoxifene, ormeloxifene, raloxifene, tamoxifen,droloxifene, levormeloxifene, and idoxifene and mixtures thereof totreat ED has particular relevance when administered in combination witha PDE-5 inhibitor to a subject who continues to have symptoms of EDdespite treatment with a PDE-5 inhibitor.

Clinically, a subject is meaningfully suboptimally responsive totreatment with a PDE-5 inhibitor when the subject scores 21 or less(corresponding to a disease severity of mild-to-moderate or worse) onthe IIEF Erectile Function domain despite PDE-5 inhibitor treatment. Ingeneral, a subject is suboptimally Responsive to PDE-5 inhibitortreatment when the subject attempts and fails to complete sexualintercourse over the course of several weeks, notwithstanding treatmentwith a PDE-5 inhibitor. The administration of fispemifene, enclomifene,ospemifene, clomifene or toremifene to treat ED has particular relevancewhen administered in combination with a PDE-5 inhibitor to a subject whois unresponsive to treatment with a PDE-5 inhibitor. Clinically, asubject is unresponsive to treatment with a PDE-5 inhibitor when thesubject receives a score of 2 or 3 on questions 3 and 4 of the IIEFduring a screening visit. In general, a subject is not responsive toPDE-5 inhibitor treatment when the subject attempts and fails tocomplete sexual intercourse over the course of several weeks,notwithstanding treatment with a PDE-5 inhibitor.

Thus, a method of treating ED according to the invention may comprise(1) a step of administering a PDE-5 inhibitor to a subject in needthereof and observing a failure of the subject to respond; and (2) astep of administering fispemifene, clomifene, enclomifene, ospemifene,toremifene, or a mixture thereof, in combination with a PDE-5 inhibitor.A method of the invention may also comprise (1) a step of administeringa PDE-5 inhibitor to a subject in need thereof and observing a failureof the subject to respond; and (2) a step of administering one or moreselective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) including, but notlimited to, fispemifene, clomifene, enclomifene, ospemifene, toremifene,afimoxifene, arzoxifene, bazedoxifene, lasofoxifene, ormeloxifene,raloxifene, tamoxifen, droloxifene, levormeloxifene, and idoxifene andmixtures thereof in combination with a PDE-5 inhibitor

The above method of treating ED according to the invention may furthercomprise a step of measuring the testosterone level of the subject, asfollows: (1) a step of administering a PDE-5 inhibitor to a subject inneed thereof and observing a failure of a subject to have an adequateresponse; (2) measuring the serum testosterone level of the subject todetermine that the level is less than 400 ng/dL, or otherwisedetermining that the subject has low androgen levels (such as bymeasuring free testosterone); and (3) a step of administeringfispemifene, clomifene, enclomifene, ospemifene, toremifene, or amixture thereof, in combination with a PDE-5 inhibitor. These steps mayalso be performed in a different order, such as: first diagnosing thesubject with erectile dysfunction and hypogonadism; and then treatingwith fispemifene, clomifene, enclomifene, ospemifene, toremifene, or amixture thereof and observing that the subject has a suboptimalresponse; and finally a step of administering fispemifene, clomifene,enclomifene, ospemifene, toremifene, or a mixture thereof, incombination with a PDE-5 inhibitor.

Fispemifene, enclomifene, ospemifene, clomifene and toremifene mayimprove muscle wasting experienced by RN-infected men experiencingweight loss and low testosterone. Accordingly, these SERMs may be usedin conjunction with other agents in ED treatment of HIV-infected men.

Fispemifene, enclomifene, ospemifene, clomifene and toremifene may beadministered in combination with other ED agents to raise thetestosterone levels of subjects with metabolic syndrome (and the like)and improve their symptoms of ED. In addition, one or more selectiveestrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) including, but not limited to,fispemifene, clomifene, enclomifene, ospemifene, toremifene,afimoxifene, arzoxifene, bazedoxifene, lasofoxifene, ormeloxifene,raloxifene, tamoxifen, droloxifene, levormeloxifene, and idoxifene andmixtures thereof, may be administered in combination with other EDagents to raise the testosterone levels of subjects with metabolicsyndrome (and the like) and improve their symptoms of ED.

PDE-5 inhibitor as used herein includes any agent which inhibits thetype 5 cGMP-specific PDE5 enzyme, including without limitation,sildenafil, vardenafil and tadalafil, which are commercially recognizedtreatment agents for ED, all of which are typically taken orally. OtherPDE-5 inhibitors include those disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,512,002 B2,incorporated by reference.

Fispemifene has been demonstrated to raise testosterone levels and maybe administered alone to treat ED in men. A suitable dosage is expectedto be in a range of about 5 mg/day to about 1500 mg/day. In a phase Irepeated dose study, twenty-three healthy men aged 50 to 70 yearsreceived daily 10 mg, 30 mg 100 mg and 300 mg dosages of fispemifene for28 days. Fispemifene was well tolerated at all dose levels. The adverseevents reported more than once included upper respiratory tractinfection, nausea and abdominal pain. All other adverse events weresingle cases. Fispemifene at the 100 and 300 mg/day dose levelsincreased serum total testosterone levels 32% and 75% respectively.Thus, a preferred dosage range of fispemifene to treat ED is expected tobe 10 to 1000 mg/day.

As described above, fispemifene, clomifene, enclomifene, ospemifene ortoremifene (all of which are SERMs), or a mixture thereof, may beadministered in combination with a PDE-5 inhibitor to men who areunresponsive to treatment with PDE-5 inhibitors alone. In addition,selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) including, but notlimited to, fispemifene, clomifene, enclomifene, ospemifene, toremifene,afimoxifene, arzoxifene, bazedoxifene, lasofoxifene, ormeloxifene,raloxifene, tamoxifen, droloxifene, levormeloxifene, and idoxifene andmixtures thereof, may be administered in combination with a PDE-5inhibitor to men who are unresponsive to treatment with PDE-5 inhibitorsalone.

In this context “administered in combination” means: (1) part of thesame unitary dosage form; (2) administration separately, but as part ofthe same therapeutic treatment program or regimen, typically but notnecessarily, on the same day. In a preferred embodiment, the SERM andPDE-5 inhibitor are administered in combination as a fixed daily dosage.The combination of fispemifene (or other SERM) with a PDE-5 inhibitor asa unitary dosage form is a novel composition according to the invention.

Alternatively, fispemifene, clomifene or toremifene may be administeredat a fixed daily dosage, and the PDE-5 inhibitors taken on an as neededbasis, in advance of expected sexual activity, usually not more thanonce daily.

When fispemifene is administered as adjuvant therapy with a PDE-5inhibitor, a preferred daily dosage is about 10 mg to 1000 mg, morepreferably 10 mg to 300 mg.

When enclomifene is administered as a combination therapy with a PDE-5inhibitor, a suitable daily dosage is about 1 to 200 mg. Clomifene isexpected to be suitable at a daily dose of up to 100 mg in combinationwith a PDE-5 inhibitor.

A suitable daily oral dosage of PDE-5 inhibitor is believed to be inrange of 25 to 100 mg for sildenafil; 5 to 20 mg for vardenafil; and 2.5to 20 mg for tadalafil. However, the invention is not limited to thesedosage ranges, and the suitable dosage amount for these well known andextensively studied compounds is considered to be within the skill inthe art.

The invention is not limited to particular administration forms of theactive agents described herein. For example, oral formulations,parenteral injections, transdermal, buccal and rectal formulations maybe used. Oral formulations include, without limitation, powders,tablets, caplets, and gelatin capsules. Oral formulations of both thePDE-5 inhibitor (which are commercially available) and the SERM arepreferred. Suitable oral formulations of fispemifene are described inU.S. Published Application No. 2007/0104743, which is incorporated byreference.

Reference to the active agents described herein includes reference totheir pharmaceutically acceptable salts. For example, sildenafil iscommercially available as sildenafil citrate. Reference to any PDE-5inhibitor herein refers also to salts of the active agent, as disclosedin U.S. Pat. No. 6,512,002 (incorporated by reference). Likewise,reference to SERMs includes reference to their salts, as disclosed inU.S. Pat. Nos. 5,750,576 and 6,576,645, which are incorporated byreference.

The invention will be illustrated by the following non-restrictiveExperimental Section.

EXPERIMENTAL Example 1

Fispemifene has been studied in two phase I studies in humans—in asingle dose and a repeated dose study. Effect of fispemifene on hormonelevels was one main focus of the repeated dose study. The phase Irepeated dose study (number 101-50202) was a randomized, double-blind,placebo-controlled 28-day dose-escalation study performed in 31 healthy,elderly men, aged 50-68 years. The main objective of the study was toinvestigate the tolerability, safety and pharmacokinetics of fispemifeneafter repeated oral doses, but the study focused also on the effects offispemifene on serum free and total testosterone, estradiol, and otherrelevant hormones. The fispemifene doses 10, 30, 100 and 300 mg per dayand placebo were administered once every morning as capsules containing10 mg or 100 mg of fispemifene, or placebo. The dose was escalated tothe next higher dose level, if the previous dose had been safe and welltolerated evaluated by the laboratory safety determinations andultrasound of mammary glands.

The variables for safety and tolerability were adverse events, vitalsigns, 12-lead ECG, clinical laboratory evaluations, physicalexamination, ultrasound examinations (mammary glands) and inhibin B. Forpharmacokinetics, the concentrations of fispemifene and itsmetabolite(s) were to be evaluated. For pharmacodynamics, serumconcentrations of FSH, LH, estradiol, testosterone, SHBG, prolactin,aldosterone, cortisol and TSH before and during treatment were measuredand compared with the concentrations in the placebo-group.

Results on the Effects of Fispemifene on Hormones

Fispemifene increased the serum concentrations of testosterone, FSH, LH,and SHBG (Table 1) during the 28 days of treatment. Testosterone wasincreased statistically significantly with 100 mg and 300 mg fispemifenecompared with placebo. With the 300 mg dose, the increase in the meantotal testosterone was about 75% compared to the baseline concentration.Two out of six men treated with the highest fispemifene dose had theirserum testosterone level above the upper limit of normal range (i.e., 33nmol/L) during treatment. The other four had a significant increasewithin the reference range. All the six men had normal testosteronevalue at baseline. With the 100 mg dose, the increase of the mean totaltestosterone was about 32%, and all the six men in the group had theirtestosterone level increased within the reference range. The increase intotal testosterone levels in serum is illustrated by group in FIG. 1.There were no safety concerns raised with any dose suggesting that evena higher dose could be utilized if deemed appropriate.

Serum total testosterone concentrations (mean and SD) and the otherhormones at baseline and during treatment in the fispemifene study101-50202 by dose.

TABLE 1 Serum total testosterone concentrations (mean and SD) and theother hormones at baseline and during treatment in the fispemifene study101-50202 by dose. Fispemifene Fispemifene Fispemifene FispenifemePlacebo 10 mg 30 mg 100 mg 300 mg Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD MeanSD Testosterone (nmol/L) Baseline 17.25 4.2 19.33 4.7 15.00 3.5 14.274.0 15.67 3.6 Day 8 18.50 4.1 19.83 3.31 4.40 2.1 18.67 5.3 23.17 5.2Day 15 18.43 4.4 20.50 4.9 15.00 2.7 19.00 6.0 27.00 6.5 Day 22 17.508.5 22.00 4.4 15.80 3.9 17.83 4.5 27.83 4.7 Day 28 15.43 3.2 17.40 7.214.80 5.3 18.83 4.8 27.50 10.3 FSH (U/L) Baseline 5.60 3.4 5.42 3.6 9.1413.4 6.30 5.6 6.80 5.4 Day 8 5.65 2.9 5.87 4.2 9.78 14.2 7.68 7.8 8.807.6 Day 15 4.67 1.6 5.20 2.9 10.14 14.6 8.10 9.0 8.73 7.2 Day 22 4.471.6 6.60 4.1 10.18 15.1 8.20 9.0 8.85 8.1 Day 28 4.29 1.7 5.66 3.7 8.4211.6 7.73 7.9 7.57 7.0 LH (U/L) Baseline 3.11 1.6 3.47 1.0 3.58 2.0 4.121.9 4.58 2.7 Day 8 3.29 0.8 3.12 1.5 4.26 2.2 5.52 4.2 6.80 3.5 Day 153.31 0.9 2.87 1.1 5.02 2.4 6.82 7.5 6.75 4.6 Day 22 2.80 0.8 3.56 1.24.32 2.3 7.18 8.3 7.77 6.6 Day 28 2.71 0.9 3.02 0.9 4.42 2.0 7.60 9.66.70 4.8 Estradiol (pmol/L) Baseline 100.6 31.2 106.2 20.9 97.8 17.984.3 22.6 102.5 30.0 Day 8 93.8 17.1 94.7 31.2 105.6 29.8 108.3 28.9104.0 20.0 Day 15 85.0 31.6 81.7 25.4 102.4 22.2 111.5 48.2 97.8 26.9Day 22 75.0 32.4 116.6 15.1 99.6 20.4 106.3 37.4 95.5 32.9 Day 28 73.632.6 75.0 20.1 87.0 22.2 94.5 48.4 89.7 30.9 SHBG (nmol/L) Baseline 49.118.6 47.7 19.9 34.2 12.8 41.7 29.4 50.7 15.1 Day 8 44.5 16.1 46.3 21.134.2 12.2 47.7 35.2 64.2 21.3 Day 15 46.0 19.1 48.2 22.8 37.4 20.8 52.039.5 66.2 21.1 Day 22 44.9 18.4 50.2 27.1 37.2 19.2 55.7 45.3 65.2 14.8Day 28 45.0 18.5 45.2 24.3 36.6 19.1 50.8 42.8 58.3 12.3

Discussion and Conclusions

Fispemifene induced a clinically and statistically significant and dosedependent increase in the serum testosterone concentration in healthyolder men within 28 days from the start of the treatment. Also, withinthe 28-day treatment period, the increase in testosterone serumconcentration was seen in all the subjects treated with 100 mg or 300 mgfispemifene. An increase of 75% from baseline can be consideredclinically highly significant, and thus clinical benefits in men withlow testosterone can be expected. The increases also in LH and FSHsuggest that fispemifene has an antiestrogenic effect onhypothalamus/hypophysis, and that the increase in testosterone occursdue to the increase in the hypophyseal hormones. The increase intestosterone is moderate and, therefore, no harmful effects oftenassociated with external testosterone administration are expected.Furthermore, a SERM is likely to provide protection against the possiblesafety problems of testosterone like development of prostate cancer.Thus, a SERM increasing testosterone provides an optimal treatment forhypogonadism, balancing the efficacy and safety of the increasedtestosterone.

Example 2

This is a prophetic example. Subjects would be selected from men, allover twenty years of age, unresponsive to PDE-5 inhibitor treatment asdemonstrated by responses on the IIEF for a 28 day lead-in period,having morning total testosterone level less than or equal to 400 ng/dL.Half of the subjects would be assigned to the fispemifene treatmentgroup (fispemifene plus sildenafil) and half will be assigned to theplacebo control group (sildenafil without fispemifene). Subjects wouldself administer fispemifene once daily in the morning after breakfastfor 8 weeks. Subjects would take sildenafil 100 mg on an as needed basiswhen sexual activity is anticipated.

The following observations would be expected: increases in totaltestosterone levels from baseline to week 4 to week 8; improvement inIIEF erectile function domain score from baseline to week 4 to week 8;improvement in other IIEF domain scores from baseline to week 4 to week8.

Example 3

A randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled, parallel-group study ofonce-daily doses of fispemifene (100, 200, and 300 mg/day) given for 4weeks was conducted in a population of hypogonadal men. Subjects wererequired to meet all of the following inclusion criteria at screeningand prior to randomization to be eligible for the study:

1. The subject had signed a written informed consent to participate inthe study and had agreed to follow dosing instructions and complete allrequired study visits;

2. The subject was a male 2: 40 years of age at the time ofrandomization.

3. The subject had a screening total testosterone level and aconfirmatory baseline total testosterone level: S350 ng/dL. Testosteronelevels were determined from early morning (0700 h to 0900 h) specimens;and

4. The subject had a serum LH level of 1.7-15.0 IU/L and an FSH level of1.5-15.0 IU/L at the screening visit.

Subjects were excluded from the study if they had an elevated serumprolactin level, if they had evidence of benign prostatic hypertrophy,or if they were taking medications that affected thehypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis and had not adequately washed off.

There were 77 subjects total. The number of subjects randomized to the100 mg fispemifene, 200 mg fispemifene, 300 mg fispemifene, and placeboarms were 21, 21, 19, and 16, respectively.

Subjects were randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups in a1:1:1:1 ratio:

-   -   Treatment A (100 mg): fispemifene 100 mg+placebo+placebo;    -   Treatment B (200 mg): fispemifene 100 mg+fispemifene 100        mg+placebo;    -   Treatment C (300 mg): fispemifene 100 mg+fispemifene 100        mg+fispemifene 100 mg; and    -   Treatment D (Placebo): placebo+placebo+placebo.

Subjects took one dose (three capsules) of study medication once a dayat home for 4 weeks. Capsules were to be taken in the morningimmediately after breakfast, with the exception of the morning of theWeek 4 visit. Capsules were not to be taken on the morning of the Week 4visit because trough plasma levels of fispemifene were determined by ablood sample taken at this visit. Each subject was randomly assigned totreatment with one of the 3 different dose regimens of fispemifene orplacebo vehicle. Each subject received a 4 week supply of study drug.

Blood samples were taken from the subjects within 1 week prior to dosingwith study drug to establish baseline values; after 2 and 4 weeks ofrandomization; and 2 weeks after the last dose of study drug. Serum wasprepared from those samples and used to determine the mean % change frombaseline in total testosterone, free testosterone, SHBG (sexhormone-binding globulin), DHT (dihydrotestosterone), E2 (estradiol), LH(luteinizing hormone), FSH (follicle stimulating hormone), and inhibinB.

The primary efficacy endpoint was defined as percent change frombaseline in morning total testosterone levels at Week 4. Theintent-to-treat (“ITT”) population was the primary population foranalysis. The secondary efficacy endpoints included:

1. Percent change from baseline in free testosterone and calculated freetestosterone at Weeks 2, 4, and 6;

2. Percent change from baseline in total testosterone levels at Weeks 2and 6; and

3. Percent change from baseline in SHBG, DHT, E2, LH, FSH, inhibin B,and testosterone/E2 ratio at Weeks 2, 4, and 6.

These values are graphed in FIGS. 3-12 and are also shown below in tableformat in Tables 2-15 with the standard deviation from the mean(“S.D.”).

Essentially, fispemifene induced a clinically and statisticallysignificant and dose dependent increase to, but not beyond, the normalrange in the serum total testosterone concentration within 14 days fromthe start of the treatment; and this increase was maintained during thetreatment period. Serum FSH, LH, and estradiol levels were alsoincreased, confirming the observations in Example 1 and lending furthersupport to the proposed mechanism by which fispemifene raises serumtestosterone levels (i.e., that it has antiestrogenic effect onhypothalamus/hypophysis, leading to an increase in the hypophysealhormones, and thus to an increase in testosterone).

It was also confirmed that the increase in testosterone is moderate and,therefore, that the drug has a lesser likelihood of safety problems orabuse than exogenously-administered testosterone.

TABLE 2 Primary Efficacy Analysis: Morning Total Testosterone Levels(ng/dL) for Intent-to-Treat Subjects Fispemifene Pairwise ComparisonsStatistics 100 mg 200 mg 300 mg Placebo Overall 100 mg vs. 200 mg vs.300 mg vs. Study Week N 21 21 19 16 P-value Placebo Placebo PlaceboActual Value Mean ± SD 248.6 ± 68.90 249.1 ± 60.90  234.2 ± 77.69  218.6± 79.13   0.531¹ 0.228¹ 0.258¹ 0.461¹ at Baseline Median 266.0 253.0246.0 227.5 (Visit 2) Min, Max 101.0, 347.0 133.0, 334.0 17.0, 348.058.0, 334.0 Actual Value Mean ± SD 371.6 ± 83.36 387.3 ± 107.39 430.7 ±163.39 246.9 ± 95.26 NA NA NA NA at Week 4 Median 353.0 372.0 479.0265.5 Min, Max 246.0, 535.0 241.0, 626.0  8.0, 643.0 40.0, 397.0 %Change from Mean ± SD  0.60 ± 0.524 0.60 ± 0.390 0.78 ± 0.536  0.14 ±0307 <0.001¹ 0.010¹ 0.002¹ <0.001¹ Baseline Median   0.35   0.60   0.80  0.14 to Week 4 Min, Max 0.07, 1.98 −014, 127   −0.53, 1.81  −0.31,0.74  % Change front Baseline is defined as (Week 4 minus Baseline)divided by Baseline. Missing values for ITT subjects are replaced viaLOCF approach. NA = Not Applicable (not planned). ¹P-values fortreatment comparisons from non-parametric approach (Kruskal-Wallis testfor overall comparisons and Wilcoxon test for pairwise comparisons).

TABLE 3 Descriptive Summary: Free Testosterone (ng/dL) by Visit forIntent-to-Treat Subjects Fispemifene 100 mg 200 mg 300 mg Placebo StudyWeek Statistics (N = 21) (N = 21) (N = 19) (N = 16) Baseline (Visit 2) N(%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 16 (100.0%) Mean ± SD 8.35 ± 2,536 8.48 ± 3,043  8.19 ± 2,966 7.83 ± 3,498 Median  8.40  8.50 8.20 8.35 Min, Max 3.20, 12.29 4.30, 15.90 0.30, 12.30 2.00, 13.20 Week2 (Visit 4) N (%) Reported 19 (90.5%)  21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 14(87.5%)  Mean ± SD 11.6 ± 3.93 10.6 ± 3.52  12.1 ± 4.96 9.86 ± 3,710Median 10.3 10.0 12.9 9.90 Min, Max 5.7, 17.7 4.8, 16.4 0.2, 22.0 3.70,18.20 Week 4 (Visit 5) N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19(100.0%) 16 (100.0%) Mean ± SD 11.3 ± 3.40 11.8 ± 3.80  12.5 ± 5.00 8.64± 3,668 Median 10.8 12.2 14.0 8.35 Min, Max 6.4, 18.2 5.2, 19.4 0.1,21.2 1.80, 14.70 Week 6 (Visit 6) N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%)19 (100.0%) 16 (100.0%) Mean ± SD   893 ± 2,300 9.10 ± 3,307  9.30 ±3,567 9.36 ± 4,339 Median  9.80  8.06  9.80 3.55 Min, Max 4.90, 13.305.40, 16.80 0.30, 17.39 1.30, 18.36

TABLE 4 Secondary Efficacy Analysis: Free Testosterone (ng/dL) forIntent-to-Treat Subjects Fispemifene 100 mg 200 mg 300 mg PlaceboCategory Study Week Statistics (N = 21) (N = 21) 0 = 19) (N = 16)Descriptive Actual Value at Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21(100.0°%) 19 (100.0%) 16 (100.0%) Summaries (Visit 2) Mean ± SD 8.35 ±2.536 8.48 ± 3.043 8.19 ± 2.966 7.83 ± 3.490 Median 8.40  8.50 8.20 8.35Min, Max  3.20, 12.20  4.30, 15.90   030, 12.30  2.00, 13.20 % Changefrom Baseline N (%) Reported 19 (90.5%)  21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 14(87.5%)  to Week 2 Mean ± SD  040 ± 0.387 0.30 ± 0.422 0.43 ± 0.340 0.26± 0.338 Median 0.30  019    0.43 0.12 Min, Max −0.13, 1.22 −0.16, 1.83−0.33, 1.00 −0.07, 1.19 % Change from Baseline N (%) Reported 21(100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 16 (100.0%) to Week 4 Mean ± SD 0.44 ±0.490 0.47 ± 0.483 0.48 ± 0.452 0.17 ± 0.385 Median 0.38  0.41 0.40 0.05Min, Max −0.17, 2.08 −0.17, 1.52 −0.67, 1.22 −0.31, 1.05 % Change fromBaseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 16 (100.0%)to Week 6 Mean = SD 0.18 ± 0.548 0.16 ± 0.479 0.16 ± 0.308 0.25 ± 0.406Median −0.03  0.03 0.06 0.15 Min, Max −0.38, 2.16 −0.60, 1.31 −0.37,1.02 −0.31, 1.10 P-values¹ for All Arms 0.664 — — — Comparing 100 mg vs.Placebo 0.304 — — — Treatments 200 mg vs. Placebo 0.409 — — — Over Time300 mg vs. Placebo 0.245 — — — % Change from Baseline is defined as(Week 2, 4 or 6 minus Baseline) divided by Baseline. Missing values forITT subjects are replaced via LOCF approach. ¹P-values for comparingtreatment groups over time from a repeated-measures analysis of variancemodel via PROC MIXED with % change as response variable and terms oftreatment, visit (study week), and treatment by visit interactions.

TABLE 5 Descriptive Summary: Calculated Free Testosterone (ng/dL) byVisit for Intent-to-Treat Subjects Fispemifene 100 mg 200 mg 300 mgPlacebo Study Week Statistics (N = 21) (N = 21) (N = 19) (N = 16)Baseline (Visit 2) N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 18 (94.7%)  16(100.0%) Mean ± SD 4.81 ± 1,368 4.80 ± 1,143 4.66 ± 1,509 4.41 ± 1,646Median 4.95 4.70 4.94 4.36 Min, Max 2.19, 7.54  2.66, 7.29 0.23, 7.021.10, 6.94 Week 2 (Visit 4) N (%) Reported 19 (90.5%)  21 (100.0%) 19(100.0%) 14 (87.5%)  Mean ± SD 6.64 ± 1,732 6.37 ± 1,386 6.43 ± 2,1525.46 ± 1,480 Median 6.46 6.21 7.25 5.68 Min, Max 4.32, 10.27 4.11, 8.980.14, 9.79 2.66, 7.90 Week 4 (Visit 5) N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21(100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 16 (100.0%) Mean ± SD 6.59 ± 1,396 6.64 ± 1,6587.33 ± 2,589 5.01 ± 1,984 Median 6.63 6.39 8.40 4.99 Min, Max 4.15,9.13  4.05, 9.83 0.10, 10.31 0.83, 7.93 Week 6 (Visit 6) N (%) Reported21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 16 (100.0%) Mean ± SD 5.15 ± 1,0575.153 ± 1,328 5.29 ± 1,791 5.01 ± 2,001 Median 5.10 4.88 5.44 4.87 Min,Max 2.57, 7.05 3.60, 7.81 0.22, 8.02 0.83, 8.09

TABLE 6 Secondary Efficacy Analysis: Calculated Free Testosterone(ng/dL) for Intent-to-Treat Subjects Fispemifene 100 mg 200 mg 300 mgPlacebo Category Study Week Statistics (N = 21) (N = 21) (N = 19) (N =16) Descriptive Actual Value at Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21(100.0%) 18 (94.7%) 16 (100.0%) Summaries (Visit 2) Mean ± SD 4.81 ±1.368 4.80 ± 1.143 4.66 ± 1.509 4.41 ± 1.646 Median 4.95  4.70 4.94 4.36Min, Max  2.19, 7.54  2.66, 7.29  0.23, 7.02  1.10, 6.94 % Change fromBaseline N (%) Reported 19 (90.5%)  21 (100.0%) 18 (94.7%) 14 (87.5%) to Week 2 Mean ± SD 0.42 ± 0.292 0.36 ± 0.321 0.38 ± 0.262 0.23 ± 0.327Median 0.36  0.28 0.40 0.08 Min, Max  0.08, 1.00  0.01, 1.24 −0.37, 0.83−0.05.0.99 % Change from Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%)18 (94.7%) 16 (100.0%) to Week 4 Mean ± SD 0.46 ± 0.449 0.41 ± 0.3240.56 ± 0.430 0.15 ± 0.305 Median 0.36  0.40 0.59 0.14 Min,. Max −0.00,1.57 −0.15, 1.12 −0.58, 1.33 −0.30, 0.78 % Change from Baseline N (%)Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 18 (94.7%) 16 (100.0%) to Week 6 Mean ±SD 0.14 ± 0.344 0.11 ± 0.314 0.17 ± 0.276 0.15 ± 0.357 Median 0.08  0.060.10 0.06 Min, Max −0.26, 1.15 −0.37, 0.75 −0.26, 0.65 −0.30, 1.08P-values¹ for All Arms 0.217 — — — Comparing 100 mg vs. Placebo 0.094 —— — Treatments 200 mg vs. Placebo 0.184 — — — Over Time 300 mg vs.Placebo 0.048 — — — % Change from Baseline is defined as (Week 2, 4 or 6minus Baseline) divided by Baseline. Missing values for ITT subjects arereplaced via LOCF approach. ¹P-values for comparing treatment groupsover time from a repeated-measures analysis of variance model via PROCMIXED with % change as response variable and terms of treatment, visit(study week), and treatment by visit interactions.

TABLE 7 Descriptive Summary: Total Testosterone (ng/dL) by Visit forIntent-to-Treat Subjects Fispemifene 100 mg 200 mg 300 mg Placebo StudyWeek Statistics (N = 21) (N = 21) (N = 19) (N = 16) Baseline (Visit 2) N(%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 16 (100.0%) Mean ± SD248.6 ± 68.90 249.1 ± 60.90 234.2 ± 77.69  218.6 ± 79.13 Median 266.0253.0 246.0 227.5 Min, Max 101.0, 347.0 133.0, 334.0 17.0, 348.0 58.0,334.0 Week 2 (Visit 4) N (%) Reported 19 (90.5%)  21 (100.0%) 19(100.0%) 14 (87.5%)  Mean ± SD 369.9 ± 88.23 370.0 ± 72.44 379.2 ±122.04 270.1 ± 71.56 Median 350.0 354.0 427.0 288.0 Min, Max 235.0,585.0 238.0, 497.0 13.0, 526.0 162.0, 388.0  Week 4 (Visit 5) N (%)Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 16 (100.0%) Mean ± SD 371.6± 83.36  387.3 ± 107.39 430.7 ± 163.39 246.9 ± 95.26 Median 353.0 372.0479.0 265.5 Min, Max 246.0, 535.0 241.0, 626.0  8.0, 643.0 40.0, 397.0Week 6 (Visit 6) N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 16(100.0%) Mean ± SD 271.9 ± 69.21 276.2 ± 97.28 279.2 ± 102.84 247.6 ±95.06 Median 265.0 240.0 293.0 246.5 Min, Max 121.9, 414.0 162.0, 539.016.0, 423.0 40.0, 397.0

TABLE 8 Secondary Efficacy Analysis: Total Testosterone (ng/dL) forIntent-to-Treat Subjects Fispemifene 100 mg 200 mg 300 mg PlaceboCategory Study Week Statistics (N = 21) (N = 21) (N = 19) (N = 16)Descriptive Actual Value at Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21(100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 16 (100.0%) Summaries (Visit 2) Mean ± SD 248.6 ±68.90  249.1 ± 60.90  234.2 ± 77.69  218.6 ± 79.13  Median 266.0  253.0   246.0   227.5   Min, Max 101.0, 347.0 133.0, 334.0  17.0, 348.0 58.0, 334.0 % Change from Baseline N (%) Reported 19 (90.5%)  21(100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 14 (87.5%)  to Week 2 Mean ± SD 0.55 ± 0.366 0.54 ±0.337 0.60 ± 0.286 0.24 ± 0.354 Median 0.45  0.48 0.65 0.09 Min, Max0.14, 1.33 0.17, 1.42 −0.24, 1.01 −0.13, 1.03 % Change from Baseline N(%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 16 (100.0%) to Week 4Mean ± SD 0.60 ± 0.524 0.60 ± 0.390 0.78 ± 0.536 0.14 ± 0.307 Median0.35  0.60 0.80 0.14 Min, Max 0.07, 1.98 −0.14, 1.27  −0.53, 1.81 −0.31,0.74 % Change from Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19(100.0%) 16 (100.0%) to Week 6 Mean ± SD 0.15 ± 0.341 0.13 ± 0.341  020± 0.310 0.16 ± 0.374 Median 0.11  0.11 0.14 0.10 Min, Max −0.27, 1.19 −0.38, 0.79  −0.24, 0.77 −0.31, 1.10 P-values¹ for All Arms 0.017 — — —Comparing 100 mg vs. Placebo 0.020 — — — Treatments 200 mg vs. Placebo0.023 — — — Over Time 300 mg vs. Placebo 0.002 — — — % Change fromBaseline is defined as (Week 2, 4 or 6 minus Baseline) divided byBaseline. Missing values for ITT subjects are replaced via LOCFapproach. ¹P-values for comparing treatment groups over time from arepeated-measures analysis of variance model via PROC MIXED with %change as response variable and terms of treatment, visit (study week),and treatment by visit interactions.

TABLE 9 Secondary Efficacy Analysis: Sex Hormone Binding Globulin(nmol/L) for Intent to Treat Subjects Fispemifene 100 mg 200 mg 300 mgPlacebo Category Study Week Statistics (N = 21) (N = 21) (N = 19) (N =16) Descriptive Actual Value at Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21(100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 16 (100.0%) Summaries (Visit 2) Mean ± SD 18.4 ±6.96  19.5 ± 11.12 20.0 ± 10.28 16.4 ± 6.10 Median 17.0  18.0  19.0 15.5   Min, Max  8.5, 35.0  3.7, 51.0  5.6, 48.0  9.0, 30.0 % Changefrom Baseline N (%) Reported 19 (90.5%)  21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 14(87.5%)  to Week 2 Mean ± SD 0.32 ± 0.211 0.46 ± 0.255 0.55 ± 0.253 0.017 ± 0.1299 Median 0.32 0.38 0.48 0.045 Min, Max  0.00, 0.85 0.09,1.27 0.25, 1.11 −0.286, 0.222 % Change from Baseline N (%) Reported 21(100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 16 (100.0%) to Week 4 Mean ± SD 0.35 ±0.292 0.45 ± 0.338 0.47 ± 0.262 −0.013 ± 0.1403 Median 0.29 0.41 0.46−0.028  Min, Max −0.11, 1.00 0.00, 1.27 0.05, 0.93  −0263, 0.280 %Change from Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%)16 (100.0%) to Week 6 Mean ± SD 0.055 ± 0.1469 0.065 ± 0.1886 0.037 ±0.1447  0.010 ± 0.1164 Median  0.067  0.067  0.038 0.021 Min, Max−0.308, 0.294 −0.154, 0.546  −0.232, 0.296  −0.263, 0.188 P-values¹ forAll Arms <0.001 — — — Comparing 100 mg vs. Placebo <0.001 — — —Treatments 200 mg vs. Placebo <0.001 — — — Over Time 300 mg vs. Placebo<0.001 — — — % Change from Baseline is defined as (Week 2, 4 or 6 minusBaseline) divided by Baseline. Missing values for ITT subjects arereplaced via LOCF approach. ¹P-values for comparing treatment groupsover time from a repeated-measures analysis of variance model via PROCMIXED with % change as response variable and terms of treatment, visit(study week), and treatment by visit interactions.

TABLE 10 Secondary Efficacy Analysis: Dihydrotestosterone (pg/mL) forIntent to Treat Subjects Fispemifene 100 mg 200 mg 300 mg PlaceboCategory Study Week Statistics (N-21) (N-21) (N-19) (N-16) DescriptiveActual Value at Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 19 (90.5%) 19(100.0%) 16 (100.0%) Summaries (Visit 2) Mean ± SD 177.5 ± 88.58  185.2± 95.37  171.6 ± 76.42  156.5 ± 72.13 Median 180.0   168.0   179.0  149.0   Min, Max  50.0, 385.0  67.0, 398.0  50.0, 294.0  50.0, 313.0 %Change from Baseline N (%) Reported 19 (90.5%)  19 (90.5%) 19 (100.0%)14 (87.5%)  to Week 2 Mean ± SD 0.46 ± 0.342 0.50 ± 0.342 0.59 ± 0.387 0.028 ± 0.2336 Median 0.42 0.50 0.65 0.024 Min, Max  0.00, 1.09 −0.08,1.28 0.00, 1.62 −0.355, 0.509 % Change from Baseline N (%) Reported 21(100.0%) 19 (90.5%) 19 (100.0%) 16 (100.0%) to Week 4 Mean ± SD 0.41 ±0.351 0.68 ± 0.507 0.79 ± 0.504 −0.001 ± 0.2336 Median 0.33 0.61 0.73−0.082  Min, Max −0.09, 0.98 −0.04, 1.62 0.00, 1.63 −0.305, 0.450 %Change from Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 19 (90.5%) 19 (100.0%)16 (100.0%) to Week 6 Mean ± SD 0.14 ± 0.306 0.16 ± 0.335 0.24 ± 0.366 0.064 ± 0.2698 Median 0.19 0.11 0.19 0.016 Min, Max −0.43, 0.64 −0.54,0.78 −0.29, 0.98  −0.236, 0.650 P-values¹ for All Arms <0.001 — — —Comparing 100 mg vs. Placebo  0.003 — — — Treatments 200 mg vs. Placebo<0.001 — — — Over Time 300 mg vs. Placebo <0.001 — — — % Change fromBaseline is defined as (Week 2, 4 or 6 minus Baseline) divided byBaseline. Missing values for ITT subjects are replaced via LOCFapproach. ¹P-values for comparing treatment groups over time from arepeated-measures analysis of variance model via PROC MIXED with %change as response variable and terms of treatment, visit (study meek),and treatment by visit interactions.

TABLE 11 Secondary Efficacy Analysis: Estradiol (pg/mL) for Intent toTreat Subjects Fispemifene 100 mg 200 mg 300 mg Placebo Category StudyWeek Statistics (N = 21) (N = 21) (N = 19) (N = 16) Descriptive ActualValue at Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 16(100.0%) Summaries (Visit 2) Mean ± SD 18.2 ± 6.54  19.2 ± 6.23  20.8 ±7.15  19.7 ± 6.20  Median 18.0 17.0 22.0  19.0   Min, Max  10.0, 34.0 11.0, 33.0  10.0, 42.0  10.0, 33.0 % Change from Baseline N (%)Reported 19 (90.5%)  21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 14 (87.5%)  to Week 2 Mean± SD 0.40 ± 0.453 0.36 ± 0.523 0.36 ± 0.343 0.091 ± 0.3155 Median 0.320.23 0.33 0.000 Min, Max −0.15, 1.31 −0.27, 1.71 −0.45, 1.08 −0.389,0.765 % Change from Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19(100.0%) 16 (100.0%) to Week 4 Mean ± SD 0.37 ± 0.323 0.48 ± 0.556 0.38± 0.366 0.082 ± 0.2924 Median 0.31 0.43 0.29 0.000 Min, Max −0.18, 1.10−0.29, 1.50 −0.23, 1.00 −0.261, 0.750 % Change from Baseline N (%)Reported 21 (100.%)  21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 16 (100.0%) to Week 6 Mean± SD 0.16 ± 0.271 0.21 ± 0.488 0.10 ± 0.305 0.071 ± 0.3290 Median 0.130.23 0.00 0.000 Min, Max −0.17, 0.80 −0.33, 1.76 −0.32, 0.77 −0.444,1.000 P-values¹ for All Arms 0.093 — — — Comparing 100 mg vs. Placebo0.044 — — — Treatments 200 mg vs. Placebo 0.017 — — — Over Time 300 mgvs. Placebo 0.083 — — — % Change from Baseline is defined as (Week 2, 4or 6 minus Baseline) divided by Baseline. Missing values for ITTsubjects are replaced via LOCF approach. ¹P-values for comparingtreatment groups over time from a repeated-measures analysis of variancemodel via PROC MIXED with % change as response variable and terms oftreatment, visit (study week), and treatment by visit interactions.

TABLE 12 Secondary Efficacy Analysis: LH (IU/L) for Intent to TreatSubjects Fispemifene 100 mg 200 mg 300 mg Placebo Category Study WeekStatistics (N = 21) (N = 21) (N = 19) (N = 16) Descriptive Actual Valueat Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 16(100.0%) Summaries (Visit 2) Mean ± SD 4.43 + 2.438 4.25 ± 2.028 3.62 ±1.506 4.49 ± 1.699 Median 4.10  3.60 3.20 4.15 Min, Max  1.50, 13.50 1.00, 11.60  1.90, 8.00   150, 7.20 % Change from Baseline N (%)Reported 19 (90.5%)  21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 14 (87.5%)  to Week 2 Mean± SD  039 ± 0.496 0.52 ± 0.364 0.57 ± 0.414 0.18 ± 0.356 Median 0.29 0.54 0.63 0.03 Min, Max −0.40, 1.41 −0.02, 1.23 −0.11, 1.34 −0.32, 0.80% Change from Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19(100.0%) 16 (100.0%) to Week 4 Mean ± SD 0.46 ± 0.600 0.55 ± 0.412 0.57± 0.577 0.17 ± 0.295 Median 0.49  0.52 0.42 0.07 Min, Max −0.32, 2.03−0.22, 1.37 −0.19, 1.78 −0.21, 0.84 % Change from Baseline N (%)Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 16 (100.0%) to Week 6 Mean± SD 0.090 ± 0.3664 0.22 ± 0.397 0.16 ± 0.365 0.13 ± 0.362 Median 0.0000.19 0.19 0.03 Min, Max −0.537, 1.000 −0.56, 0.80 −0.41, 0.84 −0.32,1.28 P-values¹ for All Arms 0.089 — — — Comparing 100 mg vs. Placebo0.200 — — — Treatments 200 mg vs. Placebo 0.027 — — — Over Time 300 mgvs. Placebo 0.026 — — — % Change from Baseline is defined as (Week 2, 4or 6 minus Baseline) divided by Baseline. Missing values for ITTsubjects are replaced via LOCF approach. ¹P-values for comparingtreatment groups over time from a repeated-measures analysis of variancemodel via PROC MIXED with % change as response variable and terms oftreatment, visit (study week), and treatment by visit interactions.

TABLE 13 Secondary Efficacy Analysis: FSH (IU/L) for Intent to TreatSubjects Fispemifene 100 mg 200 mg 300 mg Placebo Category Study WeekStatistics (N = 21) (N = 21) (N = 19) (N = 16) Descriptive Actual Valueat Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 16(100.0%) Summaries (Visit 2) Mean ± SD  649 ± 3.738 5.91 ± 3.054 5.08 ±2.931 7.01 ± 3.399 Median 5.00  5.20 4.10 6.35 Min, Max   220, 14.90 2.40, 14.20  1.80, 12.30  2.60, 13.10 % Change from Baseline N (%)Reported 19 (90.5%)  21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 14 (87.5%)  to Week 2 Mean± SD 0.29 ± 0.222 0.33 ± 0.147 0.36 ± 0.233 0.13 ± 0.171 Median 0.27 0.28 0.31 0.10 Min, Max −0.13, 0.76 0.03, 0.60 −0.21, 0.78 −0.10, 0.47 %Change from Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%)16 (100.0%) to Week 4 Mean ± SD 0.28 ± 0.296 0.32 ± 0.157 0.29 ± 0.2060.14 ± 0.181 Median 0.24  0.33 0.28 0.13 Min, Max −0.09, 1.12 0.02, 0.58−0.24, 0.60 −0.20, 0.53 % Change from Baseline N (%) Reported 21(100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 16 (100.0%) to Week 6 Mean ± SD 0.043 ±0.2302 0.050 ± 0.1657 −0.010 ± 0.1786  0.084 ± 0.1797 Median 0.000 0.022 −0.043  0.056 Min, Max −0.345, 0.610 −0.167, 0.442  −0.255, 0.395−0.205, 0.489 P-values¹ for All Arms 0.198 — — — Comparing 100 mg vs.Placebo 0.141 — — — Treatments 200 mg vs. Placebo 0.042 — — — Over Time300 mg vs. Placebo 0.089 — — — % Change from Baseline is defined as(Week 2, 4 or 6 minus Baseline) divided by Baseline. Missing values forITT subjects are replaced via LOCF approach. ¹P-values for comparingtreatment groups over time from a repeated-measures analysis of variancemodel via PROC MIXED with % change as response variable and terms oftreatment, visit (study week), and treatment by visit interactions.

TABLE 14 Secondary Efficacy Analysis: Inhibin B (pg/mL) for Intent toTreat Subjects Fispemifene 100 mg 200 mg 300 mg Placebo Category StudyWeek Statistics (N = 21) (N = 21) (N = 19) (N = 16) Descriptive ActualValue at Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%)  16(100.0%) Summaries (Visit 2) Mean ± SD 95.1 ± 46.32 105.6 ± 59.43  127.3± 75.76  95.4 ± 60.22 Median 89.0   95.0  128.0   88.5  Min, Max  22.0,191.0  16.0, 220.0  16.0, 334.0  16.0, 250.0 % Change from Baseline N(%) Reported 19 (90.5%)  21 (100.0%) 18 (94.7%)  14 (87.5%) to Week 2Mean ± SD 0.24 ± 0.493  039 ± 0.534 0.12 ± 0.400 0.13 ± 0.363 Median0.17  0.21 0.05 0.02 Min, Max −0.44, 1.64 −0.22, 1.48 −0.42, 0.97 −0.34,0.92 % Change from Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19(100.0%) 15 (93.8%) to Week 4 Mean ± SD 0.30 ± 0.631 0.42 ± 0.862 0.016± 0.2904 0.12 ± 0.351 Median 0.09  0.12 −0.012 0.09 Min, Max −0.61, 1.86−0.44, 3.40 −0.459, 0.878 −0.29, 1.07 % Change from Baseline N (%)Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 19 (100.0%) 15 (93.8%) to Week 6 Mean ±SD 0.41 ± 0.572 0.40 ± 0.628 0.004 ± 0.3349 0.18 ± 0.583 Median 0.29 0.22 −0.057 0.00 Min, Max −0.41, 1.40 −0.34, 2.00 −0.493, 0.645 −0.63,1.28 P-values¹ for All Arms 0.097 — — — Comparing 100 mg vs. Placebo0.308 — — — Treatments 200 mg vs. Placebo 0.106 — — — Over Time 300 mgvs. Placebo 0.586 — — — % Change from Baseline is defined as (Week 2, 4or 6 minus Baseline) divided by Baseline. Missing values for ITTsubjects are replaced via LOCF approach. ¹P-values for comparingtreatment groups over time from a repeated-measures analysis of variancemodel via PROC MIXED with % change as response variable and terms oftreatment, visit (study week), and treatment by visit interactions.

TABLE 15 Secondary Efficacy Analysis: Testosterone/E2 Ratio for Intentto Treat Subjects Fispemifene 100 mg 200 mg 300 mg Placebo CategoryStudy Week Statistics (N = 21) (N = 21) (N = 19) (N = 16) DescriptiveActual Value at Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 18(94.7%) 16 (100.0%) Summaries (Visit 2) Mean ± SD 15.2 ± 6.39 14.2 ±5.73  11.5 ± 4.87  11.7 ± 4.68  Median 14.7   14.9 10.6  11.9  Min, Max 5.2, 27.0 6.3, 30.2  1.7, 23.1  4.6, 19.4 % Change from Baseline N (%)Reported 19 (90.5%)  21 (100.0%) 18 (94.7%) 14 (87.5%)  to Week 2 Mean ±SD  0.21 ± 0.457 0.25 ± 0.418 0.21 ± 0.372 0.23 ± 0.643 Median 0.18 0.19 0.15  0.14 Min, Max −0.39, 1.21 −0.29, 0.93 −0.24, 1.43 −0.27, 2.33% Change from Baseline N (%) Reported 21 (100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 18 (94.7%)16 (100.0%) to Week 4 Mean ± SD  0.22 ± 0.482 0.18 ± 0.387 0.33 ± 0.4280.11 ± 0.403 Median 0.13  0.17 0.36 −0.01 Min, Max −0.29, 1.57 −0.34,1.08 −0.53, 1.12 −0.31, 1.09 % Change from Baseline N (%) Reported 21(100.0%) 21 (100.0%) 18 (94.7%) 16 (100.0%) to Week 6 Mean ± SD −0.002 ±0.1993 0.019 ± 0.3760 0.12 ± 0.250 0.19 ± 0.633 Median 0.029 −0.030 0.11−0.01 Min, Max −0.337, 0.411 −0.517, 0.937 −0.29, 0.65 −0.40, 2.06P-values¹ for All Arms 0.923 — — — Comparing 100 mg vs. Placebo 0.878 —— — Treatments 200 mg vs. Placebo 0.922 — — — Over Time 300 mg vs.Placebo 0.661 — — — % Change from Baseline is defined as (Week 2, 4 or 6minus Baseline) divided by Baseline. Missing values for ITT subjects arereplaced via LOCF approach. ¹P-values for comparing treatment groupsover time from a repeated-measures analysis of variance model via PROCMIXED with % change as response variable and terms of treatment, visit(study week), and treatment by visit interactions.

1. A method of raising testosterone, luteinizing hormone, andfollicle-stimulating hormone in a subject suffering from erectiledysfunction and secondary hypogonadism comprising administering anamount of fispemifene sufficient to raise levels of testosterone,luteinizing hormone, and follicle-stimulating hormone.
 2. The method ofclaim 1 wherein the amount of fispemifene is effective to treat theerectile dysfunction.
 3. The method of claim 1 further comprisingadministering a therapeutically effective amount of a PDE-5 inhibitor totreat the erectile dysfunction.